IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v17y2024i5p992-d1342355.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative Life-Cycle Assessment of Electricity-Generation Technologies: West Texas Case Study

Author

Listed:
  • Jani Das

    (Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA)

  • Atta Ur Rehman

    (Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA
    Weir Esco, Portland, OR 97210, USA)

  • Rahul Verma

    (Fractal Business Analytics LLC, Austin, TX 78735-8004, USA)

  • Gurcan Gulen

    (Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA)

  • Michael H. Young

    (Bureau of Economic Geology, Jackson School of Geosciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA)

Abstract

This comparison of five power plants in West Texas is intended to provide various decision-makers and stakeholders with a holistic picture of the life-cycle environmental impacts associated with these power plants. A key contribution of this analysis is that we assumed all power plants generate the same amount of electricity over a 30-year life, taking a 500 MW combined-cycle gas turbine (CCGT) plant as a benchmark. Also, in two cases, we added battery storage to wind and solar PV facilities to render them nearly as dispatchable as the CCGT. We included the entire supply chain supporting electricity generation, which encompassed raw material sourcing, processing, manufacturing, operations, and product end of life, also called “cradle to grave”. We report on 18 environmental impacts using ReCiPe midpoint (H) impact assessment. The supply chains are global, and impacts are felt differently by host communities across the world. The results can help stakeholders identify hotspots across numerous supply chains with the highest environmental impacts. We discuss some remedial measures and challenges to inform future analysis by the research community.

Suggested Citation

  • Jani Das & Atta Ur Rehman & Rahul Verma & Gurcan Gulen & Michael H. Young, 2024. "Comparative Life-Cycle Assessment of Electricity-Generation Technologies: West Texas Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-23, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:5:p:992-:d:1342355
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/5/992/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/5/992/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cameron Hepburn & Ella Adlen & John Beddington & Emily A. Carter & Sabine Fuss & Niall Mac Dowell & Jan C. Minx & Pete Smith & Charlotte K. Williams, 2019. "The technological and economic prospects for CO2 utilization and removal," Nature, Nature, vol. 575(7781), pages 87-97, November.
    2. Atif Ali & Theodore W. Koch & Timothy A. Volk & Robert W. Malmsheimer & Mark H. Eisenbies & Danielle Kloster & Tristan R. Brown & Nehan Naim & Obste Therasme, 2022. "The Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Electricity Production in New York State from Distributed Solar Photovoltaic Systems," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-20, October.
    3. Tremeac, Brice & Meunier, Francis, 2009. "Life cycle analysis of 4.5Â MW and 250Â W wind turbines," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(8), pages 2104-2110, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abolhosseini, Shahrouz & Heshmati, Almas & Altmann, Jörn, 2014. "A Review of Renewable Energy Supply and Energy Efficiency Technologies," IZA Discussion Papers 8145, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Michael Carus & Lara Dammer & Achim Raschka & Pia Skoczinski, 2020. "Renewable carbon: Key to a sustainable and future‐oriented chemical and plastic industry: Definition, strategy, measures and potential," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 10(3), pages 488-505, June.
    3. Zhao, Xiaoli & Cai, Qiong & Zhang, Sufang & Luo, Kaiyan, 2017. "The substitution of wind power for coal-fired power to realize China's CO2 emissions reduction targets in 2020 and 2030," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 164-178.
    4. Kabir, Md Ruhul & Rooke, Braden & Dassanayake, G.D. Malinga & Fleck, Brian A., 2012. "Comparative life cycle energy, emission, and economic analysis of 100 kW nameplate wind power generation," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 133-141.
    5. Joey Disch & Luca Bohn & Susanne Koch & Michael Schulz & Yiyong Han & Alessandro Tengattini & Lukas Helfen & Matthias Breitwieser & Severin Vierrath, 2022. "High-resolution neutron imaging of salt precipitation and water transport in zero-gap CO2 electrolysis," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    6. Pinto, Edwin S. & Serra, Luis M. & Lázaro, Ana, 2020. "Evaluation of methods to select representative days for the optimization of polygeneration systems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 488-502.
    7. Savino, Matteo M. & Manzini, Riccardo & Della Selva, Vincenzo & Accorsi, Riccardo, 2017. "A new model for environmental and economic evaluation of renewable energy systems: The case of wind turbines," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 739-752.
    8. Tihamér Tibor Sebestyén, 2024. "Evaluation of the Carbon Footprint of Wooden Glamping Structures by Life Cycle Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-27, March.
    9. Gao, Chengkang & Zhu, Sulong & An, Nan & Na, Hongming & You, Huan & Gao, Chengbo, 2021. "Comprehensive comparison of multiple renewable power generation methods: A combination analysis of life cycle assessment and ecological footprint," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    10. Tabassum-Abbasi, & Premalatha, M. & Abbasi, Tasneem & Abbasi, S.A., 2014. "Wind energy: Increasing deployment, rising environmental concerns," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 270-288.
    11. Georgios Varvoutis & Athanasios Lampropoulos & Evridiki Mandela & Michalis Konsolakis & George E. Marnellos, 2022. "Recent Advances on CO 2 Mitigation Technologies: On the Role of Hydrogenation Route via Green H 2," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-38, June.
    12. Bonou, Alexandra & Laurent, Alexis & Olsen, Stig I., 2016. "Life cycle assessment of onshore and offshore wind energy-from theory to application," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 327-337.
    13. Tuğçe Beyazay & Kendra S. Belthle & Christophe Farès & Martina Preiner & Joseph Moran & William F. Martin & Harun Tüysüz, 2023. "Ambient temperature CO2 fixation to pyruvate and subsequently to citramalate over iron and nickel nanoparticles," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-11, December.
    14. Dupont, Elise & Koppelaar, Rembrandt & Jeanmart, Hervé, 2018. "Global available wind energy with physical and energy return on investment constraints," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 322-338.
    15. Subrato Acharjya & Jiacheng Chen & Minghui Zhu & Chong Peng, 2021. "Elucidating the reactivity and nature of active sites for tin phthalocyanine during CO2 reduction," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 11(6), pages 1191-1197, December.
    16. Kaldellis, John K. & Zafirakis, D., 2011. "The wind energy (r)evolution: A short review of a long history," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 1887-1901.
    17. Alizadeh, Sadegh & Avami, Akram, 2021. "Development of a framework for the sustainability evaluation of renewable and fossil fuel power plants using integrated LCA-emergy analysis: A case study in Iran," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1548-1564.
    18. Enevoldsen, Peter, 2016. "Onshore wind energy in Northern European forests: Reviewing the risks," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1251-1262.
    19. Jenniches, Simon & Worrell, Ernst & Fumagalli, Elena, 2019. "Regional economic and environmental impacts of wind power developments: A case study of a German region," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 499-514.
    20. Lloyd, Bob & Forest, Andrew S., 2010. "The transition to renewables: Can PV provide an answer to the peak oil and climate change challenges?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(11), pages 7378-7394, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:5:p:992-:d:1342355. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.